Renal perfusion with histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate compared with Ringer's solution in patients undergoing thoracoabdominal aortic open repair

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of renal perfusion with Custodiol (Dr Franz-Kohler Chemie GmbH, Bensheim, Germany) versus enriched Ringer's solution for renal protection in patients undergoing open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair.MethodsNinety consecutive patients scheduled for elective open TAAA repair were enrolled between 2015 and 2017 in a single-center, phase IV, prospective, parallel, randomized, double-blind trial (the CUstodiol versus RInger: whaT Is the Best Agent [CURITIBA] trial), and randomized to renal arteries perfusion with 4°C Custodiol (Dr Franz-Kohler Chemie GmbH, Bensheim, Germany; n = 45) or 4°C lactated Ringer's solution (n = 45). The incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients undergoing TAAA open surgery using Custodiol renal perfusion versus an enriched Ringer's solution was the primary end point.ResultsNinety patients completed the study (45 patients in each group). The incidence of postoperative AKI was significantly lower in the Custodiol group (48.9% vs 75.6%; P = .02). In the multivariable model, only the use of Custodiol solution resulted as protective from the occurrence of any AKI (odds ratio, 0.230; 95% confidence interval, 0.086-0.614; P = .003), whereas TAAA type II extent was associated with the development of severe AKI (odds ratio, 4.277; 95% confidence interval, 1.239-14.762; P = .02). At 1-year follow-up, serum creatinine was not significantly different from the preoperative values in both groups.ConclusionsThe use of Custodiol during open TAAA repair was safe and resulted in significantly lower rates of postoperative AKI compared with Ringer's solution. These findings support safety and efficacy of Custodiol in this specific setting, which is currently off-label.     

Proximal aortic repair in dialysis patients: A national database analysis

ObjectivesDialysis is a well-established risk factor for morbidity and mortality after cardiovascular procedures. However, little is known regarding the outcomes of proximal aortic surgery in this high-risk cohort.MethodsPerioperative (in-hospital or 30-day mortality) and 10-year outcomes were analyzed for all the patients who underwent open proximal aortic repair with the diagnosis of nonruptured thoracic aortic aneurysm (aneurysm, n = 325) or type A aortic dissection (dissection, n = 461) from 1987 to 2015 using the US Renal Data System database.ResultsIn patients with aneurysm, perioperative mortality was 12.6%. The 10-year mortality was 81% ± 3%. Age 65 years or more (hazard ratio [HR], 1.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03 to 1.78; P = .03), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.01-2.82; P = .047), and Black race (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.09-1.97; P = .01) were independently associated with worse 10-year mortality. In patients with dissection, perioperative mortality was 24.3% and 10-year mortality was 87.9% ± 2.2%. Age 65 years or more (HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.19-1.86; P < .001), congestive heart failure (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.11-2.57; P = .004), and diabetes mellitus as the cause of dialysis (HR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.2-2.57; P = .004) were independently associated with worse 10-year mortality. Black race (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.6-0.92; P = .008) was associated with a better outcome.ConclusionsWe described challenging perioperative and 10-year outcomes for dialysis patients undergoing proximal aortic repair. The present study suggests the need for careful patient selection in the elective repair of proximal aortic aneurysm for dialysis-dependent patients, whereas it affirms the feasibility of emergency surgery for acute type A aortic dissections.     

Late results of aortic valve repair for isolated severe aortic regurgitation

ObjectivesThe objectives were to analyze the long-term outcomes of tricuspid aortic valve repair for isolated severe aortic regurgitation and the impact of different annuloplasty techniques.MethodsThe study cohort consists of 127 consecutive patients who received aortic valve repair for isolated severe aortic regurgitation in the tricuspid aortic valve between 1996 and 2019 in our institution. Exclusion criteria were aorta dilatation (≥45 mm), connective tissue disease, active endocarditis, type A dissection, and rheumatic disease. Mean age of patients was 55.6 ± 16 years, and 80% were male. Median follow-up was 6.4 years. Time-to-event analysis was performed, as well as risk of death, reoperation, and aortic regurgitation recurrence.ResultsCusp repair was performed in 117 patients (92%), and annuloplasty was performed in 126 patients (99%) with Cabrol stitch (73%), reimplantation technique (19.7%), or ring annuloplasty (6.3%). There was no hospital mortality. At 10 and 14 years, overall survival was 81% ± 5% and 71% ± 6%, respectively, and freedom from reoperation was 80% ± 5% and 73% ± 6%, respectively. Age and left coronary cusp repair were independent predictors of reoperation. Freedom from recurrent severe aortic regurgitation (>2+) was 73% ± 5% and 66% ± 7% at 10 and 12 years, respectively. Age, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, and patch repair were independent predictors of recurrent aortic regurgitation. Type of annuloplasty had no impact on survival or reoperation.ConclusionsAortic valve repair for isolated severe aortic regurgitation in the tricuspid aortic valve is a safe procedure, and durability at 14 years is acceptable. In this study, the annuloplasty technique did not influence repair durability as was found in bicuspid aortic valve repair or aortic valve–sparing surgery. Severity of cusp pathology seems to be the main determinant of repair durability.     

Outcomes after endovascular versus open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair: A population-based study

ObjectiveWe sought to determine the early and late outcomes of endovascular versus open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair.MethodsWe performed a multicenter population-based study across the province of Ontario, Canada, from 2006 to 2017. The primary end point was mortality. Secondary end points were time to first event of a composite of mortality, permanent spinal cord injury, permanent dialysis, and stroke, the individual end points of the composite, patient disposition at discharge, hospital length of stay, myocardial infarction, and secondary procedures at follow-up.ResultsA total of 664 adults undergoing surgical repair of a thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (endovascular: n = 303 [45.5%] vs open: n = 361 [54.5%]) were identified using an algorithm of administrative codes validated against the operative records. Propensity score matching resulted in 241 patient pairs. Endovascular repairs increased during the study and currently comprise more than 50% of total repairs. In the matched sample, open repair was associated with a higher incidence of in-hospital death (17.4% vs 10.8%, P = .04), complications (26.1% vs 17.4%, P = .02), discharge to rehabilitation facilities (18.7% vs 10.0%, P = .02), and longer length of stay (12 [7-21] vs 6 [3-13] days, P < .01). Long-term mortality was not significantly different (hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-1.50), nor were the other secondary end points, with the exception of secondary procedures, which were higher in the endovascular group (hazard ratio, 2.64; 95% confidence interval, 1.54-4.55). At 8 years, overall survival was 41.3% versus 44.6% after endovascular and open repair (P = .62).ConclusionsEndovascular repair was associated with improved early outcomes but higher rates of secondary procedures after discharge. Long-term survival after thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair is poor and independent of repair technique.     

The fate of aortic root and aortic regurgitation after supracoronary ascending aortic replacement for acute type A aortic dissection

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the fate of the preserved aortic root after supracoronary aortic replacement for acute type A aortic dissection.MethodsBetween October 1999 and March 2018, 339 patients underwent supracoronary aortic replacement for acute type A aortic dissection at our institution. Late outcomes were evaluated, including overall survival, aortic-related death, and aortic root–related reoperation. The median follow-up was 3.7 years (1.4-8.4 years).ResultsOperative mortality was 46 patients (13.6%). The cumulative incidences at 5 years for aortic root–related reoperation, aortic-related death, and non–aortic related death were 2.5%, 14.5% and 12.4%, respectively. Multivariable Cox hazard regression analysis demonstrated greater sinus of Valsalva diameter and number of commissural detachments to be significant risk factors for a composite outcome consisting of aortic-related death or aortic root–related reoperation. Mixed-effects regression demonstrated that sinus of Valsalva diameter significantly increased with time (P < .001), and aortic regurgitation significantly worsened (P < .001).ConclusionsSinus of Valsalva diameter and commissural detachment were independent predictors of unfavorable outcomes after supracoronary aortic replacement. Close follow-up is particularly necessary for these patients, and aortic root replacement at the time of initial operation may lead to more favorable late outcomes.     

Improved Outcomes of Reimplantation vs Remodeling in Marfan Syndrome: A Propensity-Matched Study

BackgroundValve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) has excellent outcomes when performed in experienced centers in well-selected patients. It is suggested that reimplantation of the aortic valve may have better durability than remodeling in patients with Marfan syndrome (MFS), although long-term comparative data are limited.MethodsBetween 1988 and 2018, 194 patients with MFS underwent VSRR at our institution. From these, we derived a propensity-matched cohort of 68 patients (44 who underwent reimplantation and 24 who had remodeling). Early outcomes included death and perioperative complications. Late outcomes were survival, probability of aortic insufficiency, and reintervention up to 20 years of follow-up. Median follow-up was 17.8 years (interquartile range, 12.0-20.6 years) for the entire matched cohort.ResultsBaseline variables were similar between reimplantation and remodeling patients after matching: age (39 ± 12 vs 40 ± 13 years, P = .75) and male sex (28 [64%] vs 15 [63%], P = 1.0). Similar 20-year survival was observed after reimplantation compared with remodeling (82% vs 72%, P = .20), whereas the probability of developing greater than mild aortic insufficiency at 20 years was increased after remodeling (5.8% vs 13%, P = .013). More patients underwent reoperation on the aortic valve after a remodeling procedure than after reimplantation of the aortic valve (18% vs 0%, P = .018).ConclusionsVSRR provides excellent long-term survival and freedom from valve-related complications outcomes in patients with MFS. Reimplantation of the aortic valve was associated with a lower risk of aortic valve reoperation and aortic insufficiency than the remodeling procedure after 2 decades of follow-up.     

Redefining “low risk”: Outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement in low-risk patients in the transcatheter aortic valve replacement era

ObjectivesGuidelines suggest aortic valve replacement (AVR) for low-risk asymptomatic patients. Indications for transcatheter AVR now include low-risk patients, making it imperative to understand state-of-the-art surgical AVR (SAVR) in this population. Therefore, we compared SAVR outcomes in low-risk patients with those expected from Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) models and assessed their intermediate-term survival.MethodsFrom January 2005 to January 2017, 3493 isolated SAVRs were performed in 3474 patients with STS predicted risk of mortality <4%. Observed operative mortality and composite major morbidity or mortality were compared with STS-expected outcomes according to calendar year of surgery. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify risk factors for these outcomes. Patients were followed for time-related mortality.ResultsWith 15 observed operative deaths (0.43%) compared with 55 expected (1.6%), the observed:expected ratio was 0.27 for mortality (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.14-0.42), stroke 0.65 (95% CI, 0.41-0.89), and reoperation 0.50 (95% CI, 0.42-0.60). Major morbidity or mortality steadily declined, with probabilities of 8.6%, 6.7%, and 5.2% in 2006, 2011, and 2016, respectively, while STS-expected risk remained at approximately 12%. Mitral valve regurgitation, ventricular hypertrophy, pulmonary, renal, and hepatic failure, coronary artery disease, and earlier surgery date were residual risk factors. Survival was 98%, 91%, and 82% at 1, 5, and 9 years, respectively, superior to that predicted for the US age-race-sex–matched population.ConclusionsSTS risk models overestimate contemporary SAVR risk at a high-volume center, supporting efforts to create a more agile quality assessment program. SAVR in low-risk patients provides durable survival benefit, supporting early surgery and providing a benchmark for transcatheter AVR.     

Percutaneous cardioplegic arrest before repeat sternotomy in patients with retrosternal aortic aneurysm

ObjectiveRedo sternotomy in patients with arterial cardiac structures adherent to the sternum carries a risk of catastrophic bleeding. In some of those cases, particularly if they have undergone multiple previous operations, deep hypothermic circulatory arrest alone may not provide sufficient time for a controlled dissection.MethodsWe present a series of 6 cases at risk for exsanguination during sternal re-entry successfully reoperated using percutaneous cardioplegic cardiac arrest induced before completed sternal re-entry to avoid or minimize the hypothermic circulatory arrest time.ResultsAll patients survived their complex operations.ConclusionsPercutaneous cardioplegic arrest allows safer repeat sternotomy in patients with arterial cardiac structures adherent to the sternum.     

Is hemiarch replacement adequate in acute type A aortic dissection repair in patients with arch branch vessel dissection without cerebral malperfusion?

ObjectiveThe study objective was to determine if hemiarch replacement is an adequate arch management strategy for patients with acute type A aortic dissection and arch branch vessel dissection but no cerebral malperfusion.MethodsFrom January 2008 to August 2019, 479 patients underwent open acute type A aortic dissection repair. After excluding those with aggressive arch replacement (n = 168), cerebral malperfusion syndrome (n = 34), and indeterminable arch branch vessel dissection (n = 1), 276 patients with an acute type A aortic dissection without cerebral malperfusion syndrome who underwent hemiarch replacement comprised this study. Patients were then divided into those with arch branch vessel dissection (n = 133) and those with no arch branch vessel dissection (n = 143).ResultsThe median age of the entire cohort was 62 years, with the arch branch vessel dissection group being younger (60 vs 62 years, P = .048). Both groups had similar aortic arch and descending thoracic aortic diameters, with significantly more DeBakey type I dissections (100% vs 80%) in the arch branch vessel dissection group. The arch branch vessel dissection group had more aortic root replacement (36% vs 27%, P = .0035) and longer aortic crossclamp times (153 vs 128 minutes, P = .007). Postoperative outcomes were similar between the arch branch vessel dissection and no arch branch vessel dissection groups, including stroke (10% vs 5%, P = .12) and operative morality (7% vs 5%, P = .51). The arch branch vessel dissection group had a significantly greater cumulative incidence of reoperation (8-year: 19% vs 4%, P = .04) with a hazard ratio of 2.89 (95% confidence interval, 1.01-8.27; P = .048), which was similar between groups among only DeBakey type I dissections (8-year: 19% vs 5%, P = .11). The 8-year survival was similar between the arch branch vessel dissection and no arch branch vessel dissection groups (76% vs 74%, P = .30).ConclusionsHemiarch replacement was adequate for patients with acute type A aortic dissection with arch branch vessel dissection without cerebral malperfusion syndrome, but carried a higher risk of late reoperation.     

Valve-sparing root replacement in patients with bicuspid aortopathy: An analysis of cusp repair strategy and valve durability

ObjectiveValve-sparing root replacement using reimplantation techniques is increasingly applied to bicuspid aortopathy. Long-term durability of cusp repair is unclear. We analyze midterm results using a conservative approach to cusp repair.MethodsFrom 2006 to 2018, 327 patients underwent valve-sparing reimplantation, 66 with bicuspid valves. Leaflets were analyzed after reimplantation. A majority (51/66) required no cusp repair. Fifteen patients had cusp repair limited to closure of unfused raphe or central plication. Patients were followed by echocardiography.ResultsMean age of patients was 44.7 ± 12.3 years. The cusp repair group had a higher incidence of preoperative moderate (10% vs 40%) or severe (4% vs 33.3%) aortic insufficiency (P < .001). There was no operative mortality or major complication. Mean follow-up was 51.6 ± 40.8 months. On postoperative echocardiography, incidence of none, trace, or mild aortic insufficiency was 41.3% (19/46), 43.5% (20/46), and 15.2% (7/46) in the no cusp repair group and 40% (6/15), 40% (6/15), and 20% (3/15) in the cusp repair group, respectively (P = .907). Few patients progressed in degree of aortic insufficiency. No patients required reoperation. At 5 years, freedom from any aortic insufficiency was 46.9% versus 15.8% (P = .013), and freedom from greater than trace aortic insufficiency was 59.1% versus 36.9% (P = .002) due to the higher rate of postoperative trace and mild aortic insufficiency with cusp repair. There was no difference in freedom from greater than mild aortic insufficiency (92.1% vs 100%; P = .33).ConclusionsValve-sparing root replacement is reliably performed with bicuspid aortic valves whether or not cusp reconstruction is necessary. Few patients progress to greater than mild aortic insufficiency. Need for reoperation is rare in midterm follow-up.     

Reappraisal of the role of motor and somatosensory evoked potentials during open distal aortic repair

ObjectiveIntraoperative motor and somatosensory evoked potentials have been applied to monitor spinal cord ischemia during repair. However, their predictive values remain controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of motor evoked potentials and somatosensory evoked potentials on spinal cord ischemia during open distal aortic repair.MethodsOur group began routine use of both somatosensory evoked potentials and motor evoked potentials at the end of 2004. This study used a historical cohort design, using risk factor and outcome data from our department's prospective registry. Univariate and multivariable statistics for risk-adjusted effects of motor evoked potentials and somatosensory evoked potentials on neurologic outcome and model discrimination were assessed with receiver operating characteristic curves.ResultsBoth somatosensory evoked potentials and motor evoked potentials were measured in 822 patients undergoing open distal aortic repair between December 2004 and December 2019. Both motor evoked potentials and somatosensory evoked potentials were intact for the duration of surgery in 348 patients (42%). Isolated motor evoked potential loss was observed in 283 patients (34%), isolated somatosensory evoked potential loss was observed in 18 patients (3%), and both motor evoked potential and somatosensory evoked potential loss were observed in 173 patients (21%). No spinal cord ischemia occurred in the 18 cases with isolated somatosensory evoked potential loss. When both signals were lost, signal loss happened in the order of motor evoked potentials and then somatosensory evoked potentials. Immediate spinal cord ischemia occurred in none of those without signal loss, 4 of 283 (1%) with isolated motor evoked potential loss, and 15 of 173 (9%) with motor evoked potential plus somatosensory evoked potential loss. Delayed spinal cord ischemia occurred in 12 of 348 patients (3%) with intact evoked potentials, 24 of 283 patients (8%) with isolated motor evoked potentials loss, and 27 of 173 patients (15%) with motor evoked potentials + somatosensory evoked potentials loss (P < .001). Motor evoked potentials and somatosensory evoked potentials loss were each independently associated with spinal cord ischemia. For immediate spinal cord ischemia, no return of motor evoked potential signals at the conclusion of the surgery had the highest odds ratio of 15.87, with a receiver operating characteristic area under the curve of 0.936, whereas motor evoked potential loss had the highest odds ratio of 3.72 with an area under the curve of 0.638 for delayed spinal cord ischemia.ConclusionsSomatosensory evoked potentials and motor evoked potentials are both important monitoring measures to predict and prevent spinal cord ischemia during and after open distal aortic repairs. Intraoperative motor evoked potential loss is a risk for immediate and delayed spinal cord ischemia after open distal aortic repair, and somatosensory evoked potential loss further adds predictive value to the motor evoked potential.     

Differences among sexes in presentation and outcomes in acute type A aortic dissection repair

ObjectiveFemale sex is a known risk factor in most cardiac surgery, including coronary and valve surgery, but unknown in acute type A aortic dissection repair.MethodsFrom 1996 to 2018, 650 patients underwent acute type A aortic dissection repair; 206 (32%) were female, and 444 (68%) were male. Data were collected through the Cardiac Surgery Data Warehouse, medical record review, and National Death Index database.ResultsCompared with men, women were significantly older (65 vs 57 years, P < .0001). The proportion of women and men inverted with increasing age, with 23% of patients aged less than 50 years and 65% of patients aged 80 years or older being female. Women had significantly less chronic renal failure (2.0% vs 5.4%, P = .04), acute myocardial infarction (1.0% vs 3.8%, P = .04), and severe aortic insufficiency. Women underwent significantly fewer aortic root replacements with similar aortic arch procedures, shorter cardiopulmonary bypass times (211 vs 229 minutes, P = .0001), and aortic crossclamp times (132 vs 164 minutes, P < .0001), but required more intraoperative blood transfusion (4 vs 3 units) compared with men. Women had significantly lower operative mortality (4.9% vs 9.5%, P = .04), especially in those aged more than 70 years (4.4% vs 16%, P = .02). The significant risk factors for operative mortality were male sex (odds ratio, 2.2), chronic renal failure (odds ratio, 3.4), and cardiogenic shock (odds ratio, 6.8). The 10-year survival was similar between sexes.ConclusionsPhysicians and women should be cognizant of the risk of acute type A aortic dissection later in life in women. Surgeons should strongly consider operations for acute type A aortic dissection in women, especially in patients aged 70 years or more.     

Ministernotomy compared with right anterior minithoracotomy for aortic valve surgery

ObjectivesMinisternotomy and right anterior minithoracotomy are the 2 main techniques applied for minimally invasive aortic valve replacement. The goal of this study is to compare early and long-term outcomes of both techniques.MethodsThe data of 2419 patients undergoing isolated minimally invasive aortic valve replacement between 1999 and 2019 were prospectively collected. Retrospectively, patients were divided into the ministernotomy group (n = 1352) and the minithoracotomy group (n = 1067).ResultsAfter propensity score matching, 986 patients remained in each group. Operation time and rate of conversion to full sternotomy were significantly higher in the minithoracotomy group than in the ministernotomy group (184.6 ± 45.2 vs 241.3 ± 68.6, relative risk, 2.54, P = .005 and .09 vs .23, relative risk, 1.45, P = .013, respectively). The 30-day mortality, excluding cardiac death, was lower in the ministernotomy group than in the minithoracotomy group (0.012 vs 0.028, relative risk, 1.41, P = .011, respectively); the intensive care unit length of stay (12.4 vs 16.5, relative risk, 1.62, P = .037, respectively) and hospital length of stay (5.4 vs 8.7, relative risk, 1.74 P = .028, respectively) were significantly longer in the minithoracotomy group. The minithoracotomy surgical approach was the strongest independent predictor of early mortality (odds ratio, 4.24 [1.67-7.35], P = .002). The actuarial survival by Kaplan–Meier analysis at 1, 3, 5, 10, and 20 years was significantly better in the ministernotomy group than in the minithoracotomy group (P = .0001). Actuarial freedom from reoperation at 5 years was 97.3% ± 4.4% in the ministernotomy group versus 95.8% ± 5.2% in the minithoracotomy group (P = .087).ConclusionsMinimally invasive aortic valve replacement using ministernotomy is associated with reduced operative time, intensive care unit stay, hospital length of stay, and postoperative morbidities and incisional pain, and improves early and long-term mortality.     

Surgery for type A aortic dissection in patients with cerebral malperfusion: Results from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection

BackgroundThe strategy for intervention remains controversial for patients presenting with type A aortic dissection (TAAAD) and cerebral malperfusion with neurologic deficit.MethodsSurgically managed patients with TAAAD enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection were evaluated to determine the incidence and prognosis of patients with cerebral malperfusion.ResultsA total of 2402 patients underwent surgical repair of TAAAD. Of these, 362 (15.1%) presented with cerebral malperfusion (CM) and neurologic deficits, and 2040 (84.9%) patients had no neurologic deficits at presentation. Patients with CM were more less likely to present with chest pain (66% vs 86.5%; P < .001) and back pain (35.9% vs 44.4%; P = .008). Patients with CM were more likely to present with syncope (48.4% vs 10.1%; P < .001), peripheral malperfusion (52.7% vs 38.0%; P < .001), and shock (16.2% vs 4.1%; P < .001). There was no difference in the incidence of Marfan syndrome (2.8% vs 3.0%; P = .870) or history of known aortic aneurysm (11.7% vs 13.9%; P = .296). Patients with CM were more likely to have a DeBakey I (63.8% vs 47.1%; P < .001) and a pericardial effusion (53.8% vs 40.6; P < .001) on presentation. There was no difference in total arch replacement (21.3% for CM vs 19.5% for no CM; P = .473). Patients with CM had an increased incidence of postoperative cerebrovascular accident (17.5% vs 7.2%; P < .001) and acute kidney injury (28.3% vs 18.1%; P < .001). In-hospital mortality was greater in patients with CM (25.7% vs 12.0%; P < .001).ConclusionsFifteen percent of patients with TAAAD presented with CM and neurologic deficits. Despite the fact that this subset of the population was older and more likely to present with peripheral malperfusion, cardiac tamponade, and in shock, in-hospital survival was noted in nearly 75% of the patients. Surgeons may continue to offer lifesaving surgery for TAAAD to this critically ill cohort of patients with acceptable morbidity and mortality.     

Outcomes of open repairs of chronic distal aortic dissection anatomically amenable to endovascular repairs

ObjectiveTo review short-term outcomes and long-term survival and durability after open surgical repairs for chronic distal aortic dissections in patients whose anatomy was amenable to thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).MethodsBetween February 1991 and August 2017, we repaired chronic distal dissections in 697 patients. Of those patients, we enrolled 427 with anatomy amenable to TEVAR, which included 314 descending thoracic aortic aneurysms (DTAAs) and 105 extent I thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). One hundred eighty-five patients (44%) had a history of type A dissection, and 33 (7.9%) had a previous DTAA/TAAA repair. Variables were assessed with logistic regression for 30-day mortality and Cox regression for long-term mortality. Time-to-event analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier methods.ResultsThirty-day mortality was 8.4% (n = 36). In all, 22 patients (5.2%) developed motor deficit (paraplegia/paraparesis), and 17 (4.0%) experienced stroke. Multivariable analysis identified low estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR; <60 mL/min/1.73 m²), previous DTAA/TAAA repair, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as associated with 30-day mortality. Patients without all 3 risk factors had a 30-day mortality rate of 2.6%. During a median follow-up of 6.5 years, 160 patients died. The survival rate was 81% at 1 year and 61% at 10 years. Cox regression analysis identified preoperative aortic rupture, eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m², previous DTAA/TAAA repair, COPD, and age >60 years as predictive of long-term mortality. Forty-five patients required subsequent aortic procedures, including 8 reinterventions to the treated segment. Freedom from any aortic procedures was 85% at 10 years, and aortic procedure-free survival was 45% at 10 years. Hereditary aortic disease was the sole predictor for any aortic interventions (hazard ratio, 3.2; P = .004).ConclusionsOpen surgical repair provided satisfactory low neurologic complication rates and durable repairs in chronic distal aortic dissection. Patients without low eGFR, redo, and COPD are the low-risk surgical candidates and may benefit from open surgical repair at centers with similar experience to ours. Patients with hereditary aortic disease warrant close surveillance.     

The fate of aortic valve after rheumatic mitral valve surgery

ObjectiveDeterioration of the native aortic valve function by a late progression of rheumatic disease is not infrequent in patients who underwent rheumatic mitral valve surgery; however, this phenomenon has not been clearly quantified.MethodsA total of 1155 consecutive patients (age 52.0 ± 12.9 years; 807 female) who underwent rheumatic mitral valve surgery without concomitant aortic valve surgery from 1997 to 2015 were enrolled. The primary end point was the composite of progression to severe aortic valve dysfunction or a requirement of subsequent aortic valve replacements during follow-up. To determine the risk factors of the primary outcome, we performed the generalized linear mixed model.ResultsThe baseline severities of aortic valve were none to trivial in 880 patients (76.2%), mild in 256 patients (22.2%), and moderate in 19 patients (1.6%). The latest 1062 echocardiographic assessments (91.9%; median, 81.2 postoperative months; interquartile range, 37.3-132.1 months) demonstrated 26 cases (0.33%/patient-year) meeting the primary end point during follow-up. Cumulative incidence of the primary end point at 10 years was 0.4% ± 0.3% and 7.4% ± 2.5% depending on the presence of mild or greater aortic valve dysfunction at baseline (P < .01). In multivariable analyses, aortic valve peak pressure gradient (odds ratio, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-1.20), aortic regurgitation degree (mild over none: odds ratio, 3.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-9.23), and time (odds ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval 1.19-1.41) were significantly associated with the occurrence of the primary end point.ConclusionsProgression of severe aortic valve dysfunction and the need for aortic valve replacement are uncommon in patients undergoing rheumatic mitral valve surgery. However, such events were relatively common among those with mild or greater aortic valve dysfunction at the time of mitral valve surgery.     

Clinical impact of the heart team on the outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement among octogenarians

ObjectivesThe effectiveness of a multidisciplinary heart team in the management of patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis is unknown. This study evaluated the impact of a heart team on the outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement in octogenarians.MethodsBetween May 2007 and January 2016, 528 patients aged 80 years or more were referred to our institutional heart team for a transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Among these, 101 were redirected to surgical aortic valve replacement (heart team group). These patients were compared with a surgical aortic valve replacement cohort (n = 506) without prior heart team screening (non-heart team group), taken from the same time period. Propensity score matching with bootstrap analysis was performed; 76 heart team patients were matched to 76 non-heart team patients. Early and late outcomes including survival and readmission for cardiovascular causes were compared.ResultsMatched subgroups were largely comparable; congestive heart failure and echocardiographic pulmonary hypertension were more prevalent in the heart team group. In-hospital mortality was significantly lower in the matched heart team group (0% vs 6.0%, bootstrap mean difference 6.0%, 95% confidence interval, 2.2-9.8). The risk of stroke, low cardiac output state, reexploration for bleeding, pneumonia, and prolonged ventilation was also significantly lower in the heart team group. There was no significant between-group difference regarding late survival (hazard ratio, 0.86, 95% confidence interval, 0.55-1.33, P = .49) or readmission for cardiovascular reasons (hazard ratio, 0.70, 95% confidence interval, 0.41-1.20, P = .19).ConclusionsPreoperative multidisciplinary assessment of octogenarians by a heart team was associated with lower in-hospital mortality and adverse events after surgical aortic valve replacement.     

Surgical outcomes of acute type A aortic dissection in patients undergoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation

ObjectivesThe surgical indications for acute type A aortic dissection (AAAD) in patients in cardiopulmonary arrest remain controversial. Outcomes of AAAD for patients who underwent cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) were evaluated.MethodsBetween 2004 and 2018, of the 519 patients who underwent AAAD repair, 34 (6.6%) required CPR before or on starting AAAD repair. The patients were divided into 2 groups, survivors (n = 13) and nonsurvivors (n = 21), to compare the early operative outcomes, including mortality and neurological events.ResultsThe major cause of cardiovascular collapse requiring CPR was aortic rupture/cardiac tamponade (n = 21 [61.8%]), followed by coronary malperfusion (n = 12 [35.3%]) and acute aortic valve regurgitation (n = 3 [8.8%]). There were 3 (23.1%) patients in the survivors group and 11 (52.4%) in the nonsurvivors group who required ongoing CPR at the beginning of AAAD repair (P = .039). Of these patients, 1 survivor and 6 nonsurvivors could not achieve return of spontaneous circulation after pericardiotomy (P = .045). Although the duration from onset or arrival to the operating room was similar (P = .35 and P = .49, respectively), overall duration of CPR was shorter in survivors (10 minutes [range, 7.5-16 minutes] vs 16.5 minutes [range, 15-20 minutes]; P = .044). All survivors without any neurological deficits showed return of spontaneous circulation after pericardiotomy. Multivariate regression modeling showed that CPR duration >15 minutes was a significant risk factor for in-hospital mortality (P = .0040).ConclusionsCPR duration beyond 15 minutes may be a contraindication for AAAD repair. Moreover, we should reconsider surgery for patients who cannot achieve return of spontaneous circulation after pericardiotomy.     

Long-term survival after xenograft versus homograft aortic root replacement: Results from a prospective randomized trial

ObjectiveThe study objective was to investigate the long-term survival of patients undergoing xenograft versus homograft full root aortic valve replacement.MethodsA total of 166 patients requiring aortic valve surgery were randomized to undergo the Freestyle (Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, Minn) bioprosthesis (N = 90) or a homograft (N = 76) full root aortic valve replacement between 1997 and 2005 in a single institution. Six patients randomly assigned to the homograft crossed over to the Freestyle bioprosthesis because of the unavailability of suitably sized homografts. All surgeons were required to adhere to the standard surgical technique for homograft root implantation previously described. Follow-up was 98.5% complete.ResultsThe mean age of the study population was 65 ± 8 years. Coronary artery bypass grafting was associated with root aortic valve replacement in 76 of 166 patients (46%, P = not significant between groups), and overall hospital mortality was 4.8% (8/166, P = not significant between groups). Median follow-up was 13.8 years (range, 0-21.8 years; 2033 patient-years). The Kaplan–Meier survival analysis showed that there was no significant difference in overall survival between the 2 arms at 5, 10, and 15 years. Twenty-year survival was 28.3% ± 5% for the Freestyle group versus 25.1% ± 5.7% for the homograft group (P = .90), which was comparable to the age- and sex-matched UK general population. The freedom from aortic valve reoperation at 20 years was comparable for the Freestyle group versus the homograft group (67.9% ± 8.8% vs 67.2% ± 10.3%, respectively; P = .74).ConclusionsThis is the first study to investigate the long-term survival of xenograft versus homograft full root aortic valve replacement from a prospective randomized trial. The observed 20-year overall survival and freedom from aortic valve reoperation serve as a benchmark for future studies on interventions for aortic valve disease in the elderly.     

Cumulative comorbid conditions influence mortality risk after staged palliation for hypoplastic left heart syndrome and variants

ObjectivePrematurity, low birth weight, genetic syndromes, extracardiac conditions, and secondary cardiac lesions are considered high-risk conditions associated with mortality after stage 1 palliation. We report the impact of these conditions on outcomes from a prospective multicenter improvement collaborative.MethodsThe National Pediatric Cardiology Quality Improvement Collaborative Phase II registry was queried. Comorbid conditions were categorized and quantified to determine the cumulative burden of high-risk diagnoses on survival to the first birthday. Logistic regression was applied to evaluate factors associated with mortality.ResultsOf the 1421 participants, 40% (575) had at least 1 high-risk condition. The aggregate high-risk group had lower survival to the first birthday compared with standard risk (76.2% vs 88.1%, P < .001). Presence of a single high-risk diagnosis was not associated with reduced survival to the first birthday (odds ratio, 0.71; confidence interval, 0.49-1.02, P = .066). Incremental increases in high-risk diagnoses were associated with reduced survival to first birthday (odds ratio, 0.23; confidence interval, 0.15-0.36, P < .001) for 2 and 0.17 (confidence interval, 0.10-0.30, P < .001) for 3 to 5 high-risk diagnoses. Additional analysis that included prestage 1 palliation characteristics and stage 1 palliation perioperative variables identified multiple high-risk diagnoses, poststage 1 palliation extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support (odds ratio, 0.14; confidence interval, 0.10-0.22, P < .001), and cardiac reoperation (odds ratio, 0.66; confidence interval, 0.45-0.98, P = .037) to be associated with reduced survival odds to the first birthday.ConclusionsThe presence of 1 high-risk diagnostic category was not associated with decreased survival at 1 year. Cumulative diagnoses across multiple high-risk diagnostic categories were associated with decreased odds of survival. Further patient accrual is needed to evaluate the impact of specific comorbid conditions within the broader high-risk categories.